Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

SRG wrote:Fair enough, I wouldn't have taken the team if I didn't have a plan for them

Sure. But value is relative per league. It's hard to join a new league, especially if you've been out of the game for a while, and be able to assess value properly.

Draft pick value is dependent on how strong drafts are here. Market might be slim for certain positions. etc.

It's generally more of: you run trades through him, as opposed to just posting instead and having everyone freak out and yell for veto.

I will keep that in mind

Heat have only posted 4 times in the last 50 days. And no depth chart.

UOducksTK1 wrote:Heat have only posted 4 times in the last 50 days. And no depth chart.

He lurks in the shadows

He submitted bids in FA and has consistently signed into the board

OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.

UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.

Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha

I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though

Oregon Ownage wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.

Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha

I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though

I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.

So many things we can do IMO.

UOducksTK1 wrote:

Oregon Ownage wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.

Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha

I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though

I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.

So many things we can do IMO.

The main problem isn't lack of activity though. It's lack of interest. That's the first problem to address, in my opinion.

pistolpetejr wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:

Oregon Ownage wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.

Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha

I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though

I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.

So many things we can do IMO.

The main problem isn't lack of activity though. It's lack of interest. That's the first problem to address, in my opinion.

Right so either fire those who are uninterested, or put rules in place that will eventually weed them out because it'll make them hard to thrive when they are inactive.

Otherwise we are stuck with GMs who do nothing with their team, promote no activity, and stay in their inactive state of mind for years.

Cool thing is when we ever restarted, we know which GMs not to keep.

UOducksTK1 wrote:

pistolpetejr wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:

Oregon Ownage wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.

Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha

I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though

I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.

So many things we can do IMO.

The main problem isn't lack of activity though. It's lack of interest. That's the first problem to address, in my opinion.

Right so either fire those who are uninterested, or put rules in place that will eventually weed them out because it'll make them hard to thrive when they are inactive.

Otherwise we are stuck with GMs who do nothing with their team, promote no activity, and stay in their inactive state of mind for years.

Cool thing is when we ever restarted, we know which GMs not to keep.

That’s good and all, but hand in hand with that we have the issue of finding GMs to fill teams. How do you propose we go about that? I know Oregon tried the reward model but not much doing there. Maybe some other ideas?

I'd rather have a open spot, than a GM who posts 4 times every 50 days.

If there are too many open spots, then maybe it's time to hang it up. IDK.

Hi, I saw your ads on reddit. I'm interested to test my luck in this one. Can I take T-Wolves?

draftbust wrote:Hi, I saw your ads on reddit. I'm interested to test my luck in this one. Can I take T-Wolves?

Absoluetly, there are a perfect team to learn the ropes with.

thanks! looking forward to enjoy my time here